Bolton's Kyle Dempsey admits assaulting Maryport doorman

He's now pleading guilty to this so could possibly go to jail! Sentencing is on 11th April so he could miss the end of the season and ruined his career.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Wonder what St Sharon will do?

Get the 'vile thug' out of the club or turn the proverbial blind eye to it?

After all 'to err is human, to forgive divine' (Alexander Pope).

It's a bit of a moral quandary really, action such as assault can be deemed by some organisations as bringing his employer into disrepute and thus can be a sackable offence (irrespective if he's jailed or not).

No doubt nearly all Wanderers fans will rush to his defence and want him to stay (wonder if they'd do the same for someone who isn't playing so well such as Kachunga for example?) but if the doorman who he assaulted was your father or your son, would you want him playing for your club every week?

I wouldn't.

Anyway being football I'm sure morale's will be swept under the carpet for the greater good of football, as per usual.

Well that’s the knuckle draggers career down the drain.

I wouldn’t want this arsehole at our club no matter how good he was!

karlypants wrote:Well that’s the knuckle draggers career down the drain.

I wouldn’t want this arsehole at our club no matter how good he was!

It sounds like Satday night handbags in a drinking club in Maryport to me. I'd be wondering about provocation and whether him and his Dad gave any more than they got? 

I expect that they might have been advised to plead guilty rather than suffer the heavy penalties of losing on a 'not guilty' plea.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:
It sounds like Satday night handbags in a drinking club in Maryport to me. I'd be wondering about provocation and whether him and his Dad gave any more than they got? 

I expect that they might have been advised to plead guilty rather than suffer the heavy penalties of losing on a 'not guilty' plea.

Who the hell goes to a club with their dad? 

I can't think of anything worse.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:

karlypants wrote:Well that’s the knuckle draggers career down the drain.

I wouldn’t want this arsehole at our club no matter how good he was!

It sounds like Satday night handbags in a drinking club in Maryport to me. I'd be wondering about provocation and whether him and his Dad gave any more than they got? 

I expect that they might have been advised to plead guilty rather than suffer the heavy penalties of losing on a 'not guilty' plea.

You might well be right Bob, I don't know any different.

There does however seem to be a video of the whole thing and I doubt they are pleading guilty if it shows that they have done no wrong.

I've speculated previously that there may have been some form of a 'deal' being done (if those things happen in real life and not just in movies) and I wouldn't be therefore surprised if they both end up with a fine and some sort of community service (and an award of damages to the doorman).

It may well have been provocation and handbags but it clearly looks as though punches have been thrown rather than people walking away from it.

I don't think the club will punish him as such although I suspect some sort of PR exercise will be made of it featuring Dempsey doing something good and being all sorry and contrite.

(I was really having a little pop at St Sharon and her values and how they might be a little bit conflicted when face to face with something unexpected from one of her star players - we all know that footballers can usually get away with most things that the rest of us can't...

...usually because they have the best lawyers money can buy!!!).

Here's Phil Coleman's report in the News & Star:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Coleman was in the news recently for his work in exposing fraudulent psychiatrist, Zholia Alhemi.
What a surprise that she got away with it for 20 years!!!!!

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

It’s a difficult one this. It seems to have been a good bit more than handbags at dawn if the doorman’s injuries are anything to go by and if Kyles father also kicked a door in it sounds like more than just self defence too. I do though recall the assault by Steven Gerrard in a club a few years ago where the video evidence clearly shows Gerrard punching the guy unprovoked. I was certain he’d also be severely punished but as usual being a footballer, he wasn’t. Dempsey’s profile is nowhere near as high but from what we know it’s not looking good for the two of them. The doorman’s there to do his job and attempt to keep all customers safe and if the Dempsey’s were being disorderly, which I assume they were, then it’s hard to defend them in this case and like other thugs they should serve a sentence, unfortunate as it would be for the club and Kyles future career.

Whitesince63 wrote:It’s a difficult one this. It seems to have been a good bit more than handbags at dawn if the doorman’s injuries are anything to go by and if Kyles father also kicked a door in it sounds like more than just self defence too. I do though recall the assault by Steven Gerrard in a club a few years ago where the video evidence clearly shows Gerrard punching the guy unprovoked. I was certain he’d also be severely punished but as usual being a footballer, he wasn’t. Dempsey’s profile is nowhere near as high but from what we know it’s not looking good for the two of them. The doorman’s there to do his job and attempt to keep all customers safe and if the Dempsey’s were being disorderly, which I assume they were, then it’s hard to defend them in this case and like other thugs they should serve a sentence, unfortunate as it would be for the club and Kyles future career.

We don't know if the doorman was being excessively aggressive or abusive but I suspect something must have triggered the Dempsey reaction. It seems more likely to me to have been one of them at first with the other joining in in support.

I haven't noticed young Dempsey having a particularly short fuse on the pitch but I can imagine his ex-rugby league Dad not taking kindly to being shoved about or abused, if that's what happened.

Anyway its all in the hands of a young recently appointed Judge to decide on the punishment. I wonder if Judge Archer has ever had the pleasure of spending a Saturday night drinking in a West Cumbrian water hole.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Thanks for the link above to the local newspaper article, Bob.

It does seem we are somewhat right about there being something of a 'plea bargaining' but not exactly in the way it is shown in the american movies.

It seems that before going to court someone can plead guilty to something or other BUT guilty only in the way they lay out the facts.

It seems it is then up to the prosecution to accept that scenario, in which the judge will then base a sentence on, without the need for a formal trial, or reject their 'facts' and go to court to prove that the incident happened but in a different (and presumably more damning way to the defendant) than was admitted to.

The big difference between real life here and the movies seems to be the judge still sets the sentence - but obviously if you plead guilty to some lesser event than what really happened and the prosecution accepts that rather than proving it was a lot more severe and warranted a stiffer tariff, then the judge will obviously issue a lighter sentence than he would otherwise have done.

It's seems to be all pointing (if I'm reading the signs correctly) that Dempsey, Snr and Jnr, will have admitted to doing something wrong but mitigated why they acted that way and although the prosecution might likely know different that all concerned (the bouncer in particular) will accept their version rather than take it further.

A fine, community service, and compensation to the bouncer is the outcome I would likely expect.

I would imagine Dempsey Jnr, will end up doing some PR work for the club in the community as some sort of penance and redemption.

Thanks Sluffy.

I don't think there's plea bargaining involved. More a case of risk assessment by the Dempseys' legal team imo. The young Judge will have to have regard to sentencing guidelines but will still have quite a bit of room for manoeuvre.

The case of the fraudulent psychiatrist is more interesting to me. How did she get away with it for all those years? Could it be that that's the way the GMC and the NHS operate?

Lady Bobsworth and I have just finished watching a documentary on the Wirecard fraud. Its not just on these shores that regulators seem to be as useful as chocolate firescreens.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

There isn't plea bargaining, I was trying to make the point that our version of 'such a thing' is that the defence can put forward a guilty plea based on how they claimed were the facts - it is then up to the prosecution to accept that version (which may or may not be fully true) but enough to secure a conviction, or move to a trial in which they hope to prove their case that the event did happen but that it did so in a more 'serious' way than which the defence is admitting to.

So on one hand there is no need for a trial but the defender is judged for sentence on that of a 'lighter' event happened, or go to trial and have to prove to the court that what happened was at a 'more serious' level, in order for the judge to award a stiffer sentence accordingly (both within the sentencing guidelines).

The difference to the defence may mean a non custodial sentence, the difference to the prosecution being that they may go to court and still not be able to prove the offence to be as serious enough to warrant the higher tariff.

There is no plea bargaining as such - the prosecution can't offer a lighter sentence if the defence admits to the offence because the judge is the arbiter and awards the sentence within the sentencing guidelines that he is required to work to.

The fake psychiatrist case was reported on the BBC a couple of days ago -

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Sluffy wrote:Wonder what St Sharon will do?

That comes across as a bitter comment.

I know she's not your idol Ken but without her we might not have a club.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

Sluffy wrote:Wonder what St Sharon will do?

That comes across as a bitter comment.

I know she's not your idol Ken but without her we might not have a club.

Nah, I just don't believe you can be all things to all people, all the time.

I have no axe to grind with Sharon and I don't doubt she is a good person.

She's also a businesswomen.

Business and morals don't often go together, sooner or later you have to make a choice between what is good for the business but bad morally, or good morally but bad for the business.

If Sharon wants to portray her business (the club) doing everything right and proper, then how will she react to one of her star employees admitting to an assault and potentially serving a prison sentence?

Will she say nothing, say he's done wrong and has been punished and deserves a second chance, or say we don't want someone who does that sort of thing representing the club?

I don't know.

If I had to make a guess I would say she would probably stay quiet and let Evatt face things, saying something like Dempsey regrets what he has done, been punished by the law, will learn from his mistake and will do some PR stuff for the club by way of atonement and seeking forgiveness.

You know, the usual drivel when some footy player has done wrong and it is in the public arena.

Would that square with Sharon's moralistic approach?

Personally I would think not.

But business is business and business usually always wins over moral's.



And seeing that you mentioned him, Ken kept the club going in business terms alone, yet everybody and their dog was up in arms about how immorally he did so, in not paying the players, staff. or even Dale Vincent, etc.

Seem's ironic if those who saw no right in how business came before morals for Anderson, now have no problem in letting business come first before morals in the case of one of our star players who has admitted an assault and faces the prospect of jail.

I'm just playing really by highlighting a moral dilemma for someone who has told us how highly she rates morals.


IF Sharon did terminate his contract (I highly doubt she would) because of her values and morals, would you applaud her for sticking by them, or think it was a big mistake for the club (especially whilst we still have a good chance of reaching the play offs)?

There is no way he will be sent down for something like this. These days you only go to jail if you’ve done something really bad. I used to get in scraps on nights out, well… when I say scraps I never had a mark on me, the other blokes or bouncers would end up on a trolley heading to the infirmary. But despite spending a few nights in the cells I never was close to going to jail. Dempsey will be just fine.

The Dempseys have been in Carlisle Crown Court today. That's probably why Kyle was missing yesterday.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Bolton Wanderers footballer 'lost it' in Maryport Labour club brawl

FOOTBALLER Kyle Dempsey has admitted to a court he is “embarrassed” and might have jeopardised his career after he “completely lost it” and attacked a social club doorman who was left bleeding and injured.

Former Carlisle United midfielder Dempsey, a recent Wembley winner with his current League 1 club Bolton Wanderers, admits carrying out a joint assault on Darryl Jarvis at Maryport Labour Club with his dad, ex-rugby league professional Michael Shane Dempsey.

Their violence, on 16th July last year, came just hours after Kyle Dempsey, 27, had played for Bolton at Carlisle’s Brunton Park in a summer friendly fixture, watched by his 50-year-old dad and family members.

Kyle Dempsey, of Blackpool, and Michael Dempsey, of Whitecroft, Maryport, admit assaulting Mr Jarvis, causing actual bodily harm, having forced their way into the club they had previously been prevented from entering.

Michael Dempsey also admits damaging a door. But the prosecution dispute their claims that they merely went “overboard” and acted in excessive self-defence during an incident graphically captured on CCTV.

Evidence is being given at Carlisle Crown Court in front of a judge who will rule on their level of blame before passing sentence.

Trouble flared after members of the Dempsey family returned to Maryport after the football.

It emerged today that Kyle had been briefly knocked unconscious in the street by a man who, the court heard, had caused previous trouble for them.

That man was seen heading towards the labour club at around 10-30pm with father and son then following in a bid to speak with him.

Mr Jarvis told the court he “pulled” Kyle Dempsey outside after he arrived at the club as part of a “swarm” of people.

Michael then threw a punch, he said, which connected with his face and the bouncer then recalled feeling "multiple strikes to my body and face and head” as he was “bent double” and being kept down.

Kyle was directly in front of him at that stage and Michael to his left.

Mr Jarvis broke free, reported the incident to club management and, on advice, bolted the front doors shut with the others locked outside.

But while receiving medical attention the door “burst open” and Michael “charged at me”, “aggressively”.

Mr Jarvis said he then took hold of Kyle Dempsey’s collar, denying a claim by a defence barrister that he grabbed the footballer by the throat. “I got pulled down again,” he told the court. “After a series of blows I felt an immediate strike to the left side of my head. I felt warm liquid and then realised I was bleeding.” He added: “There were a lot of females screaming, ‘get off him’.”

Mr Jarvis, who denied using anything other than restraint techniques himself, said he suffered a broken nose, chipped teeth, bruised ribs, heavy bleeding and a substantial cut to his head.

Self-employed bricklayer Michael told the court of being initially punched and taunted by Mr Jarvis — both denied by the bouncer” — before he broke through the locked club doors.

Having seen his son knocked unconscious and then comment that he didn’t want to come back to his home town due to ongoing aggravation, he admitted the assault that followed.

He saw Kyle being grabbed by Mr Jarvis and feared he would also be assaulted. “I’m thinking if he hits him (Kyle) in the same way he has hit me, he may cause serious damage to him and may finish his career.

As a parent you just want to protect your son and your family,” said Michael Dempsey. “I am embarrassed by our actions, how we got to be in that position that night, by just going out for a family day.”

Kyle told the court he saw his dad’s nose “explode” following the alleged punch by the doorman.

During the second incident, he spoke of wriggling past a female bouncer and being grabbed by the throat.

CCTV captured him getting free and then throwing punches and appearing to knee Mr Jarvis several times. “I just felt the need to defend myself against the guy because of what he was capable of doing to me. After that I am embarrassed by my actions.”

Dempsey has been warned previously by a judge that he could receive a prison sentence. Describing the impact of the incident, he said: "I know with the position I’ve got myself in now, it could be huge for me, potentially ruin my career; 27 years of building the football career I’ve had — to throw it all away with one misjudgment on one night would just absolutely break my heart, and ruin my relationship with family members and things like that.”

Directing him to the damning CCTV footage, prosecutor Gerard Rogerson said: “You’ve completely lost it there, haven’t you?”

Dempsey replied: “Yeah.”

Judge Ian Unsworth KC is due to announce his ruling tomorrow when the two defendants will then be sentenced.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Just heard on the radio he got a 12 month suspended sentence so he's been a lucky boy!

His Dad got a 13 month suspended sentence.

12 & 13 month suspended sentences.

That will teach them!